Originally posted by lawjbm I do like modern fitness images in fitness magazines, but the photography tends to be technically very good, just often not that creative. So, you end up with very fit and pretty models who likely would look good in any picture and the pictures themselves simply showcase the model's figure, but are not necessarily creative in and of themselves.
Hi,
I agree with this view .I go for this argument myself, and my goal to counter is to come up with pictures that are technically just as good, and more creative.... I am not sure I like the implementation here to counter those mag shots..you do have an attractive model that would look good in any picture.
To be more specific: (Keep in mind that this is just my opinion....)
Posing:
-Picture number 1 has a marked difference in age compared to picture 2 and 3 - the wrinkle by the face and neck that is easily removed by posing her differently as seen in picture 2 and 3.
-The direction of the eyes are reversed : Picture 1 should have the model working out, and looking away, instead of standing around with a couple weights, Picture 2 and 3 should have the model looking straight at the camera....for that attractive but challenging look that the body muscles already conveyed.
- The posing of picture 3 makes the model look shorter and boxy - and if it had been critiqued alone would not have complimented her well. Only from seeing picture 1 and 2 we know her figure is more slim/slender and less boxy.
Composition:
#1 is a little off, with the background being like that....
PP:
If old look is really what you are going to stick with - that is fine - but I suggest removing the borders. It bothers me - the borders suggests photoshop...while the picture suggests 1900. I think stick with your guns all the way.
PS: I found some pictures that are technically good, very creative, and the lighting is beyond superb. ...hm. I may try and imitate these pictures myself :
Bodybuilder Performing Bicep Curl with Dumbbell | iStock
Take it with a grain of salt!
Cheers